Monday, 31 August 2015

A few weeks ago some friends with a disability registered a muted
protest on social media during the Melbourne Writers Festival (MWF) expressing
their outrage at the festival's inclusion of Peter
Singer. I joined them in expressing my disapproval, but living in
Brisbane, I couldn't do much. Then last week I discovered he was invited to the
Brisbane
Writer's Festival (BWF) too. Then, I got really angry.

For those of you who don't know where this outrage stems from,
Singer is a man who believes all foetuses that show physical abnormalities
(re: disabilities) should be aborted in ALL circumstances. Not only do I find his views offensive, but I'm deeply disappointed that
an institution that I love is endorsing these views. In putting forward this
view Singer advocates that the lives of people with disabilities should be
terminated, and are not worthy of life. This is selective genocide. Singer's
views are not a matter of promoting diversity of opinion, this is marginalising
and actively shunning people with disabilities.

In his book Practical Ethics, Singer argues the case for selective
infanticide. He deems it unfair that "At present parents can choose
to keep or destroy their disabled offspring only if the disability happens to
be detected during pregnancy. There is no logical basis for restricting
parents' choice to these particular disabilities. If disabled newborn infants
were not regarded as having a right to life until, say, a week or a month after
birth it would allow parents, in consultation with their doctors, to choose on
the basis of far greater knowledge of the infant's condition than is possible
before birth." His perspective also takes account of a disabled
child's place within their family.

"The birth of a child is usually a happy event for the parents.
They have, nowadays, often planned for the child. The mother has carried it for
nine months. From birth, a natural affection begins to bind the parents to it.
So one important reason why it is normally a terrible thing to kill an infant
is the effect the killing will have on its parents.

"It is different when the infant is born with a serious disability.
Birth abnormalities vary, of course. Some are trivial and have little effect on
the child or its parents; but others turn the normally joyful event of birth
into a threat to the happiness of the parents, and any other children they may
have. "Parents may, with good reason, regret that a disabled child
was ever born."

If you some point in your life you need reading glasses, should doctors
abort you in the womb because you will not have perfect vision?

When I found out that Singer was going to present at BWF, I decided to
put my money where my mouth was. On Friday, I wrote an email to the BWF director
Julie Beveridge echoing the above arguments. This morning, I got a
lengthy, thoughtful response, the beginning of which read:

Thank you for your email, and for bringing to my attention this
particular view point of Peter Singer, it’s not one I was familiar
with.

I empathise deeply with your position...

Peter Singer has been engaged at the festival to discuss this latest
book The Most Good You Can Do, a call to action for individuals to
live a life of effective altruism that involves doing the most good possible.
Altruism is a topic that is extremely popular amongst Brisbane audiences and
Peter’s Good Thinking lecture is a continuation of a discussion BWF has been
having over a couple of years on the topic. Previous conversations in this area
include Inspire Happiness, with Matteiu Ricard who discussed holistic giving.
Festivals like BWF are made up of hundreds of writers with
different viewpoints on a variety of topics. It’s my job to program thought
provoking content for audiences, and the topics discussed in Peter’s book The
Most Good You Can Do are reflective of broader conversations about
living more meaningful and connected lives. By programming a particular
individual BWF is not endorsing any or all views held by those individuals, but
providing a platform for conversation, debate, inspiration and entertainment.

The rest of her email recognised the lack of content regarding
disability in the festival program, and to her great credit Beveridge invited me
to establish a session specifically regarding disability and writing. I am
going to take her up on the offer. I wasn't expecting it, or for her to
take Singer off the festival program at this late stage, so the response to my
initial correspondence far exceeded my expectations. Beveridge went as far as
she could go, but it still doesn't address the larger problem.

As a friend of mine, ASN, posted on her Facebook yesterday:

If any other minority in Australia was targeted in the work of this man
he would be shunned! Could you imagine if he suggested selecting against
children with 'gay genes'? He would be accused of genocide of the gay
community! Or what about race? He would be Hitler reincarnated. Not one of
these groups or their allies would stand for it. It would be called
unacceptable and rightly so.

To believe that an entire group of people have no
right to life is sickening. Human variation is normal. If he targeted these
people so many people in the community would be outraged, they would have
boycotted these events. They would have publicly complained and the man would
have been asked not to come. Just like when the American's were invited to
preach hate speech about women at Hillsong here. What he preaches is no
different. It is hate speech about disability and it is just as wrong as if he
was sprouting that we should select against gays or race...

How is this possible? It is a really shit time to be disabled in
Australia right now for many reasons, but to have this man allowed to publicly
discuss his eugenic ideas has taken it to a whole new level. Before you tell me
he has a right to his opinion please tell me how you would feel if this was
your gay child they were discussing, or if someone was advocating for the
eradication of your different genes? You remember how the holocaust happened?
It happened when the good people allowed bad things to happen to those who were
different to them. We already have doctors who advocate the termination of
disabled children, or the pulling of life support for people with
disabilities...

Forums such as BWF and MWF are designed to be places that act focal
points for cultural debates in this country. In allowing Singer to participate
they are condoning his opinions on selective genocide. These festivals
represent a reflection of the political and cultural classes in this country,
and their participants regard themselves to be 'intellectuals'. If these
'intellectuals' willingly support Singer and his murderous views, what hope
have we fourth class citizens got? It is indeed a
shit, shit time to be a person with a disability in Australia.

Thursday, 20 August 2015

This week 94 years ago Franklin Delano Roosevelt was first diagnosed with the polio virus. So began a history making period of reflection and perseverance that would change the world. Less than twelve years later he would begin his term as President of the United States while being unable to walk and instead utilising a wheelchair for movement.

Every day I and my compatriots with physical disabilities are treated as fourth class citizens. We are shunned, ignored, bullied, forgotten and constantly undervalued.

The most important figure in modern history and I share comparable movement of our legs. Because of this, our brains were forced to compensate. A society that underestimates the more than 1 million physically disabled Australians, is a society that undervalues the crucial values of human life: courage, tenacity, fortitude and a sense of realism. Our nation not only disregards these assets, they wilfully ignore them. If the progress of our community is judged by how we treat those who are disadvantaged, then it is truly a cesspool of self interest and greed.

If only the majority were forced into an compulsory period of reflection so they could truly know what it is like to struggle, maybe those of us who have physical disabilities would gain the respect we are entitled to. Instead most equate 'struggle' to menial day to day concerns that are based upon economics and social standing.

Humans cannot truly empathise until they have been through pain and emerged stronger from the experience.

Thursday, 13 August 2015

At the age of 6 in 1990, I remember playing Balloon Soccer at Regency Park Centre (commonly referred to as a 'special school') when I saw a middle aged man off to the side. He had a mullet with a slightly grey tinge. You could tell the older kids knew who he was, you sensed that they loved him.

"Who's that?" I asked

"It's Russell Ebert!"

Russell Ebert, as even a passing fan of South Australian Football would know (and I would find out just moments later), was my home state's best, most consistent and is its most decorated player. On Saturday a statue of him will be unveiled at Adelaide Oval​. He was not only a champion footballer, but he is champion human too.

Russell turned up to my Electric Wheelchair Sports Awards Ceremonies every year and presented all the trophies to us. My favourite year was 1995, when I picked up 9 trophies, including sweeping all of the junior categories. At that awards night I was 11. I had surgery 3 weeks before to lengthen my already tight hamstrings and was forced to wear splints with my legs outstretched. I was in pain and despite my successful night, still not very happy. As I collected my last trophy Russell shook my hand and said something I will never, ever forget.

Now you've got more trophies than I have

All my pain was gone.

If you're wondering why I follow Port Adelaide Football Club​ so passionately look no further for a better example. The club's greatest player ever gave his time, and more importantly his respect, to us. We didn't ask him to come. He wanted to.

This was long before footy players were posting all their good deeds on social media. He just did it. No Camera crews, no promotions, he just cared.